MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

8292432 Urinary phthalate metabolite concentrations by occupation and industry: evidence from the Canadian Health measures survey

2025· article· en· W4414852993 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patrick Hinton, Ryann E. Yeo, Joanne Kim, Daniel R. S. Middleton, Katherine Pullella, Victoria H Arrandale, Nathan DeBono

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsOccupational Cancer Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhthalateBiomonitoringMetaboliteUrineGeometric meanPlasticizerAnthropometryBenzhydryl compounds

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Phthalates are ubiquitous endocrine-disrupting compounds linked to numerous adverse health outcomes, including hormone-sensitive cancers. Previous studies of phthalates, such as the widely used plasticizer di-2-ethylhexylphthalate (DEHP), have identified important environmental determinants, but few have examined their association with occupational factors. We sought to identify occupations with elevated urinary phthalate biomarker concentrations in a nationally-representative biomonitoring study of adults in Canada. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study of 4,180 individuals aged 20-80 years from the Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS) between 2007-2011 (cycles 1-2) and 2016-2019 (cycles 5-6). Spot urine samples were analyzed for concentrations of 11 phthalate metabolites quantified using chromatography and spectrometry. Creatinine-corrected molar sum groups were constructed to describe DEHP and high- and low- molecular weight phthalate (HMWP & LMWP, respectively) exposures. Linear regression models estimated predicted least-squares adjusted geometric means (GMs) and geometric mean ratios by occupation and industry groups. Models were adjusted for dietary, sociodemographic, and anthropometric factors. Results Phthalate concentrations (nmol/g creatinine) were elevated among women, older adults, individuals of Asian ethnicities, smokers, urban residents, frequent consumers of grain products, and those in the earliest CHMS cycles. By occupation, LMWP concentrations were highest among labourers in processing, manufacturing, and utilities (GM[LMWP] = 559.92; 95% CI: 333.03-941.40). Workers in these occupations were commonly employed in clothing, electrical, and machinery manufacturing industries. HMWP and DEHP concentrations were highest in trades helpers, construction labourers, and related occupations (GM[HMWP] = 124.94; 95% CI: 88.10-177.18) as well as workers in natural resources, agriculture, and related production (GM[DEHP] = 64.10; 95% CI: 46.39-88.56), respectively. Among women, elevated LMWP and DEHP concentrations were observed in installers, repairers, servicers, and material handlers. Conclusion Results suggest heterogeneity in phthalate exposure by occupation and sex. Findings will be used to inform subsequent investigations of breast and prostate cancer risk.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.337 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals→French-language works237,207→